[Part 1/2]

# "PEACE CONDITIONS" IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION

Source: LS vol XVII
Notes: Includes plan-outline, preliminary drafts, analysis of Martov article

"PEACE CONDITIONS" IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION

In objecting to Rosa Luxemburg (see the article cited above), Lenin
reproached her for having "said not a word on the merits of the question."
"It is undoubtedly true," — he wrote (p. 451), — "that Norwegian petty
bourgeoisie, wishing at their own expense to have their own king and having
failed in a popular referendum to establish a republic, displayed very poor
petty-bourgeois qualities. It is undoubtedly true that 'Huysmans,' if he did
not notice this, displayed equally poor and equally petty-bourgeois qualities."
"But what does all this have to do with it???" — wrote Lenin (see the cited
article) and brought forward arguments on the merits. In his statement "Frak"
En evidently took the side of "Huysmans," arguing that he "did not want a
little king."
7 See Works of Lenin vol. XVII, p. 156.
8 The matter concerns a bill on national equality, submitted to the IV State
Duma by the RSDLP Faction (see Works of Lenin vol. XVII, pp. 291—292).
9 An opponent's confusion was evidently caused by the following thought
of Lenin: "... an unconditional obligation for a Marxist to defend the most
decisive and most consistent democratism in all parts of the national question"
— Lenin wrote in "Critical Notes on the National Question" (Works vol. XVII,
p. 145). "This is a task that is, chiefly, negative in character. And beyond it
the proletariat cannot go in supporting nationalism, for beyond it begins the
'positive' (affirmative) activity of the bourgeoisie, striving to strengthen na-
tionalism."
10 The Polish Socialist Party "Proletariat" arose in 1900 from a group that
split off, led by Kulchitsky, from the PPS, and published the organ "Proleta-
riat." The party put forward the demand for Poland's autonomy, came out in
favor of terror, and stood for close ties with the Russian revolutionary move-
ment. The party had little influence on the masses and in 1907, after a series
of failures, disappeared from the scene.
11 See note 49, p. 251.
18'.84

"PEACE CONDITIONS" IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION

FEBRUARY 1916

The document published below, under the title ""Peace Conditions" in
Connection with the National Question," represents a plan-outline of a report
that was delivered by Lenin in Zurich on February 25 and 26, 1916 (see letter
No. 78 in Lenin Collection XI, p. 206, and the recollections of M. Kharitonov
in "Notes of the Lenin Institute," bk. II, pp. 422—423). In Geneva Lenin
delivered a report on the same topic on March 4, 1916, as is evident from a
file of the Department of Police (No. 343, section 3, ll. 49—24), in which a
brief summary of the report is given (see also letter No. 82, p. 211 in Lenin
Collection XI).

Whether this report also took place in Lausanne, as was supposed (see
the same letters), could not be established.

In the archive of the Lenin Institute there are preserved three sheets of
manuscript in notebook format, the pages of which are numbered by Lenin in
pencil: 1—4. On the first page is an excerpt from an article by Kautsky in
"Neue Zeit" of November 27, 1914 (see below point I of "Materials for the
Report," p. 255); the second is blank; on the third is the excerpt "Marx on
Lopatin" (point XVIII, p. 290); on the fourth is the excerpt "Kautsky on
Peace" (point VII, pp. 264 and 266); on the fifth is the "Outline of L. Mar-
tov's Article" (p. 240). The plan-outline of the report is written on the reverse
side of the fifth page of this manuscript. The sheet of manuscript with the
record of the outline of Martov's article and the plan-outline of the report
has creases lengthwise and crosswise.

To the right of the plan-outline is a preliminary sketch of the plan (b),
written in pencil (some words circled in ink), crossed out. To the left is the
same plan in reworked form (a), written in ink. In several cases the numbering
of the paragraphs of the plan written in fair copy is corrected in ink pencil.
Some insertions and notes are also written in ink pencil, which are all
indicated in the footnotes.

The outline-analysis of Martov's article in Nos. 47 and 48 of "Our Voice"
(в) is written in ink.

II.

"PEACE CONDITIONS" IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION.

* FINAL TEXT OF PLAN-OUTLINE.

I:

1. "Peace" = a current and popular slogan. (Priests, bourgeoisie, gov-
ernments...) 2

2. "Peace" as a mood of unconscious protest. 3

3. Charles Kautsky. "Struggle for Peace," "program of peace"... "Every-
one agrees." 4 Hypocrisy. CC 1 3

4. Gorter on peace. Correct! Gorter 457—9; 441. 6 ("Friedensheuchelei")*

* — "hypocritical striving for peace." Ed.

5. Huysmans. Already a program of peace: 7

(1) Self-determination of nations.

(2) Democratization of foreign policy.

(3) Strengthening of parliamentary control.

(4) Arbitration courts.

II part

(5) Against annexations. 8

(6) United States of Europe.

6. "Hypocrisy" (N.R.H. in "Berner Tagwacht" 10 Novem-
ber new article). 11

7. Brailsford. III. 1914 book 12 and his pamphlet "Union of Democratic
Control." 13

8. "Hush now, hush," lulling of the proletariat.

9. "United States of Europe" (and "trusts" of Trotsky). 14

10. Sum = deception of the working class. (All chauvinists of so-
cialism are in favor. (Quotation from Kautsky 21. XI. 1915)). 15

| p. 4 beginning | * 16

II:

16/# 11. "Self-determination of nations!"

a) chauvinists 16 (Fabians, 17 Austerlitz, 18 Parvus, 19 Lensch, 20
Semkovsky, 21 Liebman, 22 Yurkevich. 23

b) Kautskyans,
| p. 4 | * 24

c) leftists = Marxists............... 25

17. 12. Martov 26 and "Worker's Morning" 27.......... ("Self-Defense" 28

versus Engels 1866 ^ 29

15. 13. Resolutions of 1913 of our party 30 { articles in "Enlightenment"
and in "Social Democrat" } 31

14. 14. Petty-bourgeois utopias of "equal nations" and the reality of
imperialism: oppressing and oppressed nations. 32

12. 15. "Testing the tooth" Marx versus Lopatin. 33

13. 16. Marx on Ireland. 1869 34 (cf. Marx 1848 on Germany). 35

11. 17. Russian c.d. in polemic with "Pravda." "Did not undertake to
defend the right of secession from Russia".... 36

* Written in pencil. Ed.
Second series of numbering written in pencil. Ed.

18. Separation or liberation for union?

19. Zimmerwaldist declaration of R.S.D. "They do not think what they
say." 37

20. Gorter and self-determination versus "colonial program"......... 39

21. Misfortune to be born in small states.

22. Colonies and Rosa Luxemburg (ich bin ich...). 40*

23. "Cultural-national autonomy." 41 Its reactionary character.

24. Rapprochement and fusion of nations.

NB: 25. SS ** "Program of Peace" = struggle with deception of
workers by means of talk about peace. 1 !

26. In the national question preparation of peoples by propaganda of
internationalism, but not doctrinaire, but living. 111

Martov "attacked" Pannekoek + Gorter, bypassing the main point =
Kautskyanism. 42

NB: Letter of Engels 1882 on colonies. 43

6.

"PEACE CONDITIONS" IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION

* PRELIMINARY SKETCH OF PLAN-OUTLINE.

Brailsford (confer Kautsky) and "Union of Democratic Control." 11

"United States of Europe" and Trotsky.

"Self-determination of nations" Huysmans with + "Self-defense."

Self-determination of nations and R.S.D. 15 + Gorter Pannekoek).

Semkovsky and divorce. (Semkovsky + Liebman + Yurkevich.

Parvus + Lensch + Austerlitz + ...* etc. etc.

"Polish independents" 45 (Worker's Morning). 46

Struggle with nationalism. Rapprochement and fusion of nations.

Cultural-national autonomy.

"Liberation of oppressed nations."

Reference to oppression.

What is annexation?

Merits of R.S.D. and the Dutch. 47

Misfortune to be born in a small country.

Sweden and Norway (confer Rosa Luxemburg). 48

Imperialism and rapprochement of nations in the assessment of the
bourgeoisie.

Zimmerwaldist declaration of R.S.D. "They do not think what they say."

Russian c.d. and "freedom of secession from Russia."

| Peace as a mood, (Cannon fire) — as an approach, awakening.

A) "Peace" (as most current and popular slogan). { Governments,
bourgeoisie, priests. }

B) K. Kautsky and H[uysmans]. "Everyone agrees".......

Deception. Hypocrisy.

(1[5]) "Self-determination of nations" ("4 points of Huysmans") + United
States of Europe. — 2) Democratization of foreign policy. — 3) Strength-
ening of parliamentary control. — 4) "Arbitration courts." — 5[1]) Against
annexations.)

c) Gorter on peace (see Zimmerwald left International Flugblätter No. 1) 49

d) Self-determination. Posing of the question. Oppressing and oppressed.

e) Rosa Luxemburg and Gorter.

f) "Testing the tooth."

g) "Worker's Morning" and Martov.

h) "Cultural-national autonomy."

i) Self-determination as separation and as liberation.

j) "Self-defense" and its reference to self-determination versus Engels
1866: "Russia robbed"

k) Rosa Luxemburg and Berne-Fichte ("I am I, what is outside me is
sustenance"). 50*

* Not deciphered. Ed.

** — I am I, and everything besides me is a means to life (nutritive medium). Ed.

[DIAGRAM showing millions, peoples, great-power, medium and small, oppressed]

v.

OUTLINE-ANALYSIS OF L. MARTOV'S ARTICLE "WHAT FOLLOWS FROM THE RIGHT TO NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATION."

Martov in 47 and 48 of "Our Voice" 51

In § I — imperialism is oppression of nations. 52 Correct.

Further: "financial capital stopped the process of formation of national
states" 53

NB Incorrect! Colonies. Asia. Balkans, cf. Hilferding. 54

§ II. Attacked Pannekoek and Gorter, on their error in argumentation. 55

a) And said nothing about Kautsky, not only his error but his hypocrisy,
falsity, prostitution of Marxism.

(cf. Zimmerwald left 56 and Vorbote) 57

b) "not obligated" to support separations always (Armenian question) 58

Falsity! The main point is bypassed: freedom of separation.

= Kautsky. "Zu viel verlangt"* ...59

§ III. From the right to self-determination one cannot deduce participation
in defense. 60

(error here is the negation of national wars).

* — "An excessive demand." Ed.

---

1 The matter concerns, apparently, the peace encyclicals of Pope Benedict XV
(from September 8, 1914, November 1 of the same year, and others). See the article
"Der Weltkrieg und die katholische Kirche" ("World War and the Catholic Church")
by August Erdmann in No. 19 of "Die Neue Zeit" from August 6, 1915. In the archive
of the Lenin Institute there is preserved a copy of this article with Lenin's markings.

2 On steps directed toward concluding peace (in particular, a separate peace
between Germany and Russia), both on the part of governments and the bourgeoisie,
see M. Erzberger "Germany and the Entente," GIZ, 1923. M., pp. 198—200, as well
as V.I. Semennikov "The Politics of the Romanovs on the Eve of Revolution. From
the Entente to Germany." GIZ 1926, pp. 9—72.

In the article "Questions of Peace" Lenin wrote: "In favor of peace in general
stand unconditionally all, down to Kitchener, Joffre, Hindenburg and Bloody Nikolai,
for each of them wishes to end the war..." (Works vol. XVIII, p. 226).

3 In the article "Bourgeois Philanthropists and Revolutionary Social-Democracy"
(vol. XVIII, p. 155), Lenin wrote: "Unconscious popular masses (petty bourgeoisie,
semi-proletarians, part of the workers, etc.) by their desire for peace in the most
indefinite form express growing protest against war, growing vague revolutionary mood."

4 Kautsky, who in 1909 still remained generally on the ground of revolutionary
Marxism, with the beginning of the imperialist war abandoned his former views and
took a wavering position between internationalists and defensists, covering social-
chauvinism with internationalist phrases.

In a letter to Shlyapnikov of October 17, 1914 (see Lenin Collection II, pp. 194—195),
Lenin wrote of Kautsky that he is "now more harmful than all the rest. So dangerous
and vile is his sophistry, covering with the smoothest and most polished phrases the
villainy of opportunists (in 'Neue Zeit'). Opportunists are an obvious evil. The German
'center' with Kautsky at its head is a concealed evil, diplomatically repackaged, muddying
the eyes, mind and conscience of workers, most dangerous of all" (see "Materials for the
Report," point I, p. 253).

5 The notation "KK 1," as well as the notations to § 4 "p. 4 beginning" and "ф: p. 4,"
made by Lenin in ink pencil, correspond to special sheets (with the same kind of notations),
which are referred to in the introductory remark on p. 236. By the sense of the quotations
excerpted by Lenin on these sheets, it is evident that these notes were intended for the
corresponding paragraphs of the report.

6 Herman Gorter — a left Dutch socialist, later a communist. During the war an inter-
nationalist. The matter concerns Gorter's pamphlet "Der Imperialism, der Weltkrieg und
die Sozialdemokratie," which came out in Amsterdam in 1914 and was translated into
German in 1915. There is a Russian translation of this booklet, which Lenin called "excel-
lent": "Imperialism, World War and Social-Democracy," trans. M. Ulyanova, GIZ 1920
(see "Materials for the Report," point II, p. 254).

7 Camille Huysmans — secretary of the International Socialist Bureau of the II Interna-
tional. During the war a social-patriot. Made attempts to restore the II International,
coming out in its defense at an extraordinary congress of the Dutch party in Arnhem on
January 9, 1916. Organizer of conferences of socialists of neutral countries.

In his speech at the congress in Arnhem, arguing that the II International "has not died,"
Huysmans said: "Before acting, we had to clarify the state of affairs. Therefore, the plan
of our work amounts to two tasks: 1) The convening of separate meetings of s.d. parties
of neutral countries, the Entente powers and the Central Powers to discuss four points
that were to form the basis of all resolutions on peace. 2) The invitation of separate delegations
to The Hague for detailed discussion of these points. As you know, socialists of neutral countries
gathered in Copenhagen on January 17 and 18, 1915, socialists of the Entente powers — in
London on February 14, socialists of Germany and Austria — in Vienna on April 20, 1915.
Of course, the resolutions adopted at all these meetings do not agree on all points. But both
in Copenhagen and in London and in Vienna, social-democrats demanded for all nations the
right to self-determination. And in Copenhagen and in London and in Vienna, social-democrats
demanded democratization of diplomacy and strengthening of parliamentary control. And in
Copenhagen and in London and in Vienna, social-democrats declared themselves supporters
of arbitration courts in all kinds of conflicts between states. General agreement on these four
points, constituting the basis of the resolutions of the Stuttgart, Copenhagen and Basel con-
gresses, was already a step forward." Cited from "Our Voice" No. 4 and 18 of January 24,
1916 (see the article "On the Program of Peace" in Works of Lenin vol. XIX, pp. 49—51),
as well as "Proposal of the C.C. R.S.-D.R.P." vol. XIX, p. 59. On the London Conference see
the articles: "Concerning the London Conference" and "On the London Conference" (Works
of Lenin vol. XVIII, pp. 134—135 and 120—121), on the Vienna and Copenhagen in the
pamphlet "Socialism and War" vol. XVIII, p. 213).

8 See the article "Results of the Discussion on Self-Determination" (Works of Lenin vol.
XIX, pp. 247—251).

9 Apparently points 5 and 6 are meant.

10 The matter concerns the article by Henrietta Roland-Holst "Huysmans Rede auf dem
Parteitag der S.D.A.P." ("Huysmans' Speech at the Congress of the Social-Democratic
Workers' Party") (see "Materials for the Report," point III, p. 258).

Roland-Holst — Dutch socialist. During the war she initially held a position close to that
of Trotsky (Lenin, according to Radek, called her "Trotsky in a skirt"). In a letter to A. Kollontai
in the summer of 1915 (Lenin Collection II, p. 235), Lenin wrote: "Roland-Holst, like Rakovsky
(did you see his French pamphlet?!), like Trotsky, in my opinion all — are the most harmful
'Kautskyans' in the sense that all, in different forms, are for unity with opportunists, all, in
different forms, whitewash opportunism, all conduct (differently) eclecticism instead of revolutionary
Marxism." Later R.-H. took a more consistent internationalist position and at the Zimmerwald
Conference joined the "left" part of it.

11 Under "new article" Lenin apparently means the article by Henrietta Roland-Holst "Die
nationalistische Kampagne Huysmans in Holland" ("Huysmans' Nationalist Campaign in Holland")
in No. 43 of "Beilage zur Berner Tagwacht" of February 21, 1916. In this article H. Roland-Holst
relates two speeches by Huysmans following the congress in Arnhem: in Rotterdam and Amsterdam.
"Thanks to these speeches, every thinking worker, who does not allow himself to be used as a tool
in the hands of the social-patriotic s.d. workers' party, could convince himself that Huysmans is
not only a great patriot, but also a politician of the most ordinary sort, having nothing more in
common with socialism." Encouraged by the response his speech in Arnhem provoked, Huysmans
"used the opportunity provided to him in Rotterdam in order to 'correct' his Arnhem speech in
a patriotic sense." "He made public his social-patriotism, which he managed to conceal in Arnhem."
Huysmans sharply polemicized with the representative of the internationalists, Weinkoop, who
spoke in the discussion (see "Materials for the Report," point IV, p. 260), and called "cowards"
those who do not defend their "fatherland," do not take the side of "home and hearth," do not
defend "wives and children" when the enemy launches an attack on them. Huysmans' speech in
Amsterdam, which "was filled with incredible stupidities and vulgarities," provoked a counter-
demonstration by the left. Some of those present, who interrupted the speaker, were removed from
the meeting hall with the help of police, which the meeting chairman called.

12 The matter concerns the book by Henry Noel Brailsford "The War of Steel and Gold" ("War
of Steel and Gold").

Brailsford (b. 1873) — one of the major publicists of contemporary England. He initially belonged
to the left wing of the liberals, then entered the Independent Labour Party. During the World War,
a participant in the pacifist "Union for Democratic Control." On his book see in Lenin's article
"Collapse of the II International" (vol. XVIII, footnote on p. 248).

13 See "Materials for the Report," points V and VI, pp. 262 and 264.

14 Trotsky during the war held a centrist position, rejecting the slogan of civil war, the slogan
of defeat and the necessity of organizational rupture with social-chauvinists.

In the article "Program of Peace" — IV. "United States of Europe," placed in No. 29 of "Our
Word" of February 4, 1916, Trotsky upheld the idea that "the economic and political unification
of Europe is a necessary prerequisite for the very possibility of national self-determination... On
an all-European scale, the principle of 'right' to self-determination can receive flesh and blood
only in conditions of a European Federative republic... The economic unification of Europe,
promising enormous benefits to producer and consumer, to all cultural development generally,
becomes a revolutionary task of the European proletariat in the struggle against imperialist protectionism
and its tool — militarism. The United States of Europe — without monarchies, standing armies
and secret diplomacy — are therefore the most important component part of the proletarian program
of peace... If German armies had achieved... decisive victory... if German militarism had succeeded...
in a forcible semi-unification of Europe... the program of revolutionary European movement would
become the elimination of the violent, anti-democratic form of achieved unity while preserving and
further developing its foundations — in the form of complete elimination of tariff barriers, unification
of legislation, first of all labor legislation, etc. In other words: the slogan of the United States of
Europe — without monarchies and standing armies — would have become in the indicated conditions
the unifying and directing slogan of the European revolution... In the event of the war ending in
a 'draw'... If the capitalist states of Europe managed to unite in an imperialist trust, this would of
course mean a step forward compared to the present state, for it would first of all create a united
all-European material base for the workers' movement. The proletariat would in this case also have
to struggle not for a return to the 'autonomous' national state, but for the transformation of the
imperialist trust of states into a republican European Federation... Finally, suppose that even
during this war a mass revolutionary movement begins. It is clear that it can develop successfully
and come to victory only as an all-European movement. Remaining isolated within national frameworks,
it is doomed to destruction... The establishment of a stable regime of proletarian dictatorship would
prove conceivable only throughout all of Europe, would become in the form of a European republican
Federation. The state unification of Europe, not achieved either by force of arms or by industrial
and diplomatic treaties, would confront in this case as an urgent task of victorious revolutionary
proletariat. The United States of Europe is a slogan of the critical epoch which we have entered.
Whatever course military action may take in the future; however diplomacy may sum up the present
war; at whatever pace revolutionary movement may develop in the nearest period, the slogan of the
United States of Europe will acquire in all cases tremendous significance as the political program
of struggle of the European proletariat for power."

On Lenin's attitude toward the slogan of the United States of Europe see "Conference of Foreign
Sections of R.S.-D.R.P." (Works of Lenin vol. XVIII, p. 121), "On the Slogan of the United States of
Europe" (ibid., pp. 230—233) and "Imperialism and the Split in Socialism" (vol. XIX, p. 305).

15 See "Materials for the Report," point VII, p. 264.

16 On social-chauvinism and self-determination of nations see Works of Lenin vol. XIX, pp. 44—45.

17 Fabians, the Fabian Society — a liberal organization founded in 1884 and aiming to divert
English workers from the ideas of revolutionary socialism through propaganda of "municipal socialism"
and petty reforms, supposedly transforming capitalist society into socialist. The Fabians tried, in
Engels' expression, to "impregnate liberalism with socialism." The organ of the Fabians "The New
Statesman" ("The New Statesman"). Ideologues of the society — Sidney and Beatrice Webb. See
the article "Opportunism and the Collapse of the II International" (Works of Lenin vol. XIX, pp. 11—12),
as well as "English Pacifism and English Dislike for Theory" (vol. XVIII, pp. 139—140), in which
Lenin wrote: "...the conduct during the war of the Fabians (see, for example, their weekly 'The New
Statesman') and the German s.d. party, including Kautsky, is absolutely identical. The same, both
direct and indirect, defense of social-chauvinism; the same combination of such defense with the
readiness to speak any kind of kind, humane and almost-left phrases about peace, disarmament, etc.
and so on.

"The Fabians are more sincere and honest than Kautsky and Co., for they did not promise to stand
for revolution, but politically they are one and the same."

18 Friedrich Austerlitz (b. 1862) — one of the leaders of the Austrian s.d. party, editor of the central
organ "Arbeiter Zeitung" ("Workers' Gazette"); during the war he held a starkly chauvinist position.

See "Materials for the Report," point IX, p. 268.

19 Parvus (A.L. Gelfand) (1869—1924) — in the epoch of the war an extreme social-chauvinist, editor
and publisher of the social-imperialist journal "Die Glocke" ("The Bell"). At the same time he engaged
in large-scale speculation, accepting contracts for the army. After the October Revolution Parvus asked
through Radek for permission to come to Soviet Russia, but Lenin rejected this request (see K. Radek
"Portraits and Pamphlets." GIZ 1927, p. 131) (see "Materials for the Report," point X, p. 270).

20 Paul Lensch, before the war one of the editors of the s.d. newspaper "Leipziger Volkszeitung"
("Leipzig People's Gazette"), where F. Mehring, R. Luxemburg and other representatives of the left wing
contributed. During the imperialist war he became an ardent German chauvinist.

In No. 8 (of December 15, 1915) of Parvus' chauvinist journal "Die Glocke" ("The Bell") there appeared
an article by Lensch "Die Selbstbestimmungsflasche" ("Empty Talk About Self-Determination"), in which
he qualifies the slogan of the right of nations to self-determination as a "petty-bourgeois invention." In his
opinion, "talk about self-determination has nothing in common with s.d.; there is nothing about self-determination
at all in the classical literature of our party and in the writings of its founders. This slogan is a remnant
of petty-bourgeois democracy of 1848 and subsequent years and stands in the sharpest contradiction with
the international interests of the working class." See "Theses 'Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations
to Self-Determination'" (Works of Lenin vol. XIX, p. 43, footnote), the pamphlet "Socialism and War" (Works
vol. XVIII, pp. 200—201) and the article "Results of the Discussion on Self-Determination" (Works vol. XIX,
pp. 243—244, 252—253).

21 Semkovsky (literary pseudonym of S.Yu. Bronstein), a Menshevik, polemicized with Lenin on the national
question and in particular on the question of the right of nations to self-determination, against which he came
out (see among others his article "Simplified Marxism in the National Question" Nos. 69 and 71 of "New
Workers' Gazette" of October 29 and 31, 1913). As is evident from a letter to V.A. Karpinsky of February 24,
1916 (see Lenin Collection XI, p. 212), Lenin used in his report "Peace Conditions in Connection with the National
Question" a footnote to Semkovsky's article "The Disintegration of Russia?" ("Free Tribune"), placed in No. 45
of "Our Voice" of March 21, 1915 (Lenin erroneously states that the article was placed in the Parisian "Voice"
(predecessor of "Our Voice") (see the above-mentioned letter to Karpinsky).

In this article Semkovsky writes: "...Even before the war the writer of these lines had occasion to point out in
the press (in the "New Workers' Gazette") that the interpretation of a known point of our program in the sense
of specific emphasis and advancement in agitation of the 'right to secession' could only play into the hands of the
most outright, reactionary-utopian nationalism.

...At the present time we must even more decisively reject these tendencies, more definitely than before manifested
in our own ranks (for example, in the articles of comrade Zalevsky, in the articles and reports of comrade Lenin)."

See the article "On a Caricature of Marxism and on 'Imperialist Economism'" (Works of Lenin vol. XIX, p. 233),
as well as "On the National Program of R.S.-D.R.P." vol. XVII, pp. 118—120).

22 Liebman (pseudonym of P.L. Gersh) (b. 1882) — prominent Bundist. Lenin polemicized against his opportunist
views on the national question, in particular against the article "New Edition of an Old Error" in No. 28 of "Zeit"
of September 30, 1913, in which Liebman wrote: "When the Russian s.d. fifteen years ago in its program put forward
the point of the right of every nationality to 'self-determination,' everyone asked himself: what exactly does this
fashionable expression mean? To this there was no answer. This word remained surrounded by fog. In reality at that
time it was difficult to disperse this fog. The time had not yet come to make this point concrete — people said at the
time — let it remain in fog for now, and life itself will show what meaning to put into this point." See "On the Right
of Nations to Self-Determination," Works of Lenin vol. XVII, p. 469, as well as the article "Critical Notes on the
National Question," ibid., pp. 129—159.

23 L. Yurkevich (pseudonym of L. Rybalka) — member of the CC of the Ukrainian S.D.L.P. Took active part in the
Ukrainian s.d. journal "Dzvin" ("Bell") that appeared legally in Kiev in 1913—1914 (see Works of Lenin vol. XVII, note
60, p. 716), on whose pages he preached petty-bourgeois nationalism and separatism in the Ukrainian workers' movement,
against which Lenin sharply polemicized.

See "Materials for the Report," point XI, p. 270, as well as the article "Critical Notes on the National Question"
(vol. XVII, pp. 129—159).

24 By "Kautskyans" Lenin meant besides Kautsky (see "Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-
Determination," vol. XVIII, p. 326) also Trotsky, Martov and others (see "On the Program of Peace," vol. XIX, p. 53).

See also "Materials for the Report," point VII, p. 264.

25 By "left Marxists" Lenin means: the Dutch left (Gorter and Pannekoek), the Polish (Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Radek)
and others.

Supporters of the "right to secession" defended themselves by reference to the fact that they are fighting only for the
abstract "right," but not agitating concretely for secession: recognition of the right to divorce does not mean agitation for
divorce. But when the "right to divorce" is justified on the grounds that "all husbands, madam, are better than your husband,"
then there is no possibility of separating the defense of the "right" from direct agitation for divorce (see Notification and
resolutions of the summer 1913 meeting of the C.C. and so forth).

Anton Pannekoek (pseudonym K. Horner) — during the war a supporter of the Zimmerwald left. In the article "Sozialistische
Friedensbedingungen" ("Socialist Conditions of Peace"), placed in "Berner Tagwacht" Nos. 73 and 75 of March 29 and 31,
1915, Pannekoek wrote: "...Individual people and entire peoples, both townspeople and country people, are merely tools and
objects in imperialism's struggle for its goals. But it is thereby clear that those who in these questions see nothing else except
questions of independence, and as a result advance the demand for national self-determination, look at the matter — insofar as they
are not representatives of their own national imperialism — too much from a petty-bourgeois point of view. The petty bourgeois,
who does not see the entire enormous mechanism, complains: leave me alone so that I can together with my fellow countrymen
arrange my own affairs. He sees only European questions. But the practice of real politics is determined by questions of world
domination, the enslaving of other parts of the world under the power of imperialism."

Rosa Luxemburg (Junius) — from the beginning of the war took an internationalist position. Being in the national question
an opponent of point 9 of the program of the RSDLP, Rosa Luxemburg in the article "The National Question and Autonomy"
most thoroughly formulated her objections against the slogan of "the right of nations to self-determination," which were
subjected to Lenin's criticism (see "Materials for the Report," point XII, p. 275, as well as "Critical Notes on the National
Question," "On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination").

K.B. Radek (Parabellum) — during the war joined the Zimmerwald left. Author of a series of articles on the question of
the self-determination of nations, in which he came out against Lenin. See "Materials for the Report," point XIV (a and b,
pp. 282 and 284).

Yu.O. Martov — at the beginning of the war among all Mensheviks took the position closest to internationalism (see "Position
and Tasks of the Socialist International." Works of Lenin vol. XVIII, p. 68). Martov did not, however, hold to this position for
long. Covering social-chauvinists with revolutionary phrases is characteristic of Martov's subsequent articles. See "Materials for
the Report," point XV, p. 284, as well as "Report on the Theme 'Proletariat and War'" (Works of Lenin vol. XVIII, pp. 51—52).

27 "Worker's Morning" (previously "Morning") — Menshevik legal organ published in Petersburg in the autumn of 1915. In
"Worker's Morning" articles by representatives of both trends in Menshevism were placed, but defensists predominated. See
"Materials for the Report," point XVI, p. 287.

28 Is meant the collection of extreme social-chauvinists "Self-Defense" No. 1, 1916, Petrograd. In this collection were placed
articles by V.I. Zasulich, A.I. Potresov, P. Maslov, Evg. Mayevsky, V. Levitsky and others. See "Materials for the Report," point
XVII, p. 289.

29 The matter concerns the article by F. Engels on the Polish question, published by D. Ryazanov in "Archive on the History
of Socialism" of Grunberg, 1915. See Works of Lenin vol. XIX, footnote, p. 258.

30 Lenin has in mind the resolution on the national question "summer" or "August" (named so for conspiratorial reasons) meeting
of the C.C. with party workers, which took place in Poronin (Galicia) from October 5 to 14, 1913. The resolution itself see Works of
Lenin vol. XVII, pp. 11—13.

31 In "Enlightenment" were placed Lenin's articles: "Critical Notes on the National Question" (vol. XVII, pp. 129—159), "On the
Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (vol. XVII, pp. 425—474) and others. In "Social Democrat": "On the National Program of
R.S.-D.R.P." (vol. XVII, pp. 116—121) and others.

32 See the Theses "Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination," § 6 (Works vol. XIX, p. 43), the articles
"On a Caricature of Marxism," § 2 (ibid., pp. 201—205), "Revolutionary Proletariat and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination"
(vol. XVIII, pp. 324—325).

33 In his article "On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (vol. XVII, p. 459), Lenin wrote: "Marx had the habit of 'testing the
tooth,' as he expressed it, of his socialist acquaintances, verifying their consciousness and conviction. Having become acquainted with
Lopatin, Marx writes to Engels on July 15, 1870 in the highest degree flattering assessment of the young Russian socialist... Marx, questioning
a socialist belonging to an oppressing nation about his attitude toward an oppressed nation, immediately reveals a general shortcoming among
socialists of dominant nations (English and Russian): lack of understanding of their socialist obligations with respect to oppressed nations,
regurgitation of prejudices inherited from the 'great-power' bourgeoisie."

See "Materials for the Report," point XVIII, p. 290.

34 In a letter to Kugelmann of November 29, 1869, Marx wrote: "...I am increasingly coming to the conviction — and the matter now is
only to implant this conviction in the mind of the English working class — that it will never be able to accomplish anything decisive in England
itself until it completely breaks with the policy of the ruling classes on the Irish question. The English working class must not only assist the Irish
but must take the initiative in the matter of dissolving the union established in 1801 and replacing it by a free union on a federal basis. And for such
a policy the English proletariat must hold to not for sympathy with the Irish, but because it is necessary from the point of view of their own interests.
If this is not done, the English people will remain at the apron strings of the ruling classes, because they will have to act jointly with them against
Ireland. Every national movement in England itself is paralyzed by the discord with the Irish, who constitute a very significant portion of the working
class even in England itself. The first condition for the liberation of the proletariat in England is the overthrow of the English landed oligarchy, —
but while this oligarchy retains a strong position in Ireland, its power in England itself cannot be destroyed" (Letters of Marx to Kugelmann. Library
of the Marxist under the editorship of D.B. Ryazanov, translation by M.I. Ulyanova, GIZ 1928, pp. 68—69). See also Lenin's article "On the Right
of Nations to Self-Determination" (Works vol. XVII, pp. 461—464).

35 The matter concerns the article by Marx "National Revolutions" from the "New Rhineland Gazette" (see K. Marx and F. Engels in the Epoch of
the German Revolution (1848—1850). Essays and Articles collected by F. Mehring. Edited and with a foreword by D. Ryazanov. GIZ M. 1926). In this
article Marx writes: "A nation which throughout its entire history allowed itself to be turned into a tool of oppression of all other nations — such a nation
must first prove by deed its true revolutionariness... Revolutionary Germany must, especially with respect to neighboring peoples, renounce all of its
past. Together with its own freedom it must proclaim the freedom of those peoples which until now it has oppressed. And what did revolutionary Germany
do?" (p. 111). "The guilt for... the atrocities committed in other countries with German help rests not only on the government, but in large measure on
the German people itself. Were it not for their blindness, their slavish spirit, their suitability and readiness to play the role of landsknechts, the 'good-natured'
executioners and obedient tools of lords 'by divine will,' the German name would not be so hated, cursed and despised abroad, and the peoples oppressed
by Germany would long ago have come to a normal state of free development. Now, when the Germans have shaken off their own yoke, their entire foreign
policy must be changed, otherwise we will strangle our own young, scarcely yet felt, freedom in those very chains with which we bind other peoples. Germany
will be free to the same degree that it gives freedom to neighboring peoples" (p. 116).

See also the Theses "Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination" § 5, "Marxism and Proudhonism on the National Question"
(Works of Lenin vol. XIX, p. 42).

36 See "Speech" — articles by M. Mogilyansky in Nos. 174 and 331 of July 29 (August 11) and December 3 (16), 1913, "All-Ukrainian Congress of
Students" and "Self-Determination and Separatism," as well as a note in the "Press" section in No. 340 of December 12 (25), 1913. In this note it was
stated: "Indeed, the c.d. never undertook to defend the right of 'secession of nations from the Russian state'."

In "Proletarian Pravda" see Lenin's articles: "Kadets and the 'Right of Peoples to Self-Determination'" (No. 4 of December 11 (24), 1913) and
"National-Liberalism and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (No. 12 of December 20, 1913 (January 2, 1914)) (Works vol. XVII, pp. 108—109
and 168—169); in No. 3 of "Workers' Pravda" (of July 16 (29), 1913) — "Kadets on the Ukrainian Question" (Works vol. XVI, pp. 520—521). See more
detail on this polemic in Lenin's article "On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (vol. XVII, pp. 442—450).

37 See "Materials for the Report," point XIX, p. 290, as well as the theses "Socialist Revolution and the Right of Nations to Self-Determination"
(Works of Lenin vol. XIX, pp. 46—47).

38 In the article "Results of the Discussion on Self-Determination" (Works vol. XIX, p. 263), Lenin writes: "...When Dutch and Polish social-democrats
reason against self-determination by means of arguments that are general, that is, concerning imperialism in general, socialism in general, democracy
in general, national oppression in general, in them, one might truly say, one error rides on another and is driven by another error. But you need only cast aside this obviously

[The text is an extensive footnote section and reference materials from Lenin's work. I will translate it faithfully:]

"...erroneous shell of general arguments and look at the substance of the matter from the standpoint of the peculiarity of the special conditions of Holland and Poland, it becomes clear and entirely legitimate to understand their peculiar position. One can say, without fear of falling into paradox, that when Dutch and Polish Marxists with foam at their mouths rise up against self-determination, they are not entirely saying what they want to say, or in other words: they want to say not quite what they are saying."

39 See "Materials for the Report," section II, p. 298.

40 This concerns the following citation from Rosa Luxemburg's article "The National Question and Autonomy": "One can, of course, considerably simplify this problem by separating altogether the question of colonial seizures from the national question. And this point of view is often applied consciously or unconsciously by defenders of the 'rights of nations.' It corresponds to the position taken in colonial policy by, for example, Eduard David in German social democracy or Van-Kol in Dutch, and consists in the fact that colonial seizures are a manifestation of the civilizing mission of European peoples and that they will be necessary even under a socialist system. Such a position can be briefly characterized as the 'European' application of Ludwig Börne's well-known paraphrase of Fichte's philosophical principle: 'Ich bin ich — was ausser mir ist Lebensmittel' ('I am I, and everything else besides me is a means to life [nourishing medium]'). If only European nations are recognized as nations in the precise sense of the word, and all colonial peoples are considered 'nourishing medium,' then one can speak of 'national states' in Europe, including among them France, Denmark, or Italy; then one can reduce the national question to intra-European complications. But in such a case the 'right of nations to self-determination' becomes a banner only of the ruling races and starkly reveals its actual origin in the ideology of bourgeois liberalism with its 'European cretinism.' In the understanding of socialists, this right inevitably must have a worldwide character. Mere consciousness of this is sufficient to show that hope for the realization of this 'right' within the framework of the existing system is utopia. This utopia stands in direct contradiction to the tendencies of capitalist development, on which social democracy has founded its very existence, for a universal redistribution of all existing states according to national units and a redrawing of their borders according to the pattern of large and small national states is an undertaking utterly hopeless, and from a historical standpoint—reactionary." ("Przeglad socjaldemokratyczny"—"Social Democratic Review," no. 4, 1908, pp. 502—503).

41 See "Critical Notes on the National Question" (Works of Lenin, vol. XVII, pp. 144—149), as well as "Theses on the National Question," § 7 (Works of Lenin, vol. XVI, pp. 510—511).

42 Lenin has in mind Martov's article "What Follows from the 'Right of Nations to Self-Determination'?" (nos. 17 and 18 of "Our Voice" [Saratov], dated January 17 (30) and January 24—February 6, 1916). See "On the Peace Program" (Works of Lenin, vol. XIX, p. 53).

"'CONDITIONS OF PEACE' IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION"

43 See "Summary of the Discussion on Self-Determination" (Works of Lenin, vol. XIX, p. 266).

44 See "English Pacifism and English Dislike of Theory" (Works of Lenin, vol. XVIII, p. 139).

45 Polish Social Democratic Party (see "Materials for the Report," section XII, p. 275).

[Concerns the "right wing" of the PPS (Polish Socialist Party) or "Fractions," "Nationalists," who stood for Poland's independence.]

[Concerns the article "Polish Emigration" by B. D-sky in no. 11 of "Workers' Morning" of October 15, 1916. See "Materials for the Report," section XXI, p. 304, as well as Lenin's article "On Peace Without Annexations and on Polish Independence," vol. XIX, pp. 30—32).

48 Lenin speaks of "the merits of the PSD and the Dutch" insofar as both struggled against social-chauvinism.

49 This concerns the separation of Norway from Sweden, a decision adopted by the Storting (parliament) on June 7, 1905, and confirmed by referendum. Regarding Rosa Luxemburg's position on this fact, see Lenin's article "On the Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (Works, vol. XVII, pp. 450—455).

50 "Internationale Flugblätter" ("International Leaflets," no. 1), publication of the Zimmerwald Left, in which was placed the draft resolution "World War and the Tasks of Social Democracy," submitted to the Zimmerwald Conference by the "left." See more fully Works of Lenin, vol. XIX, note 198, p. 486.

51 See above, note 40.

52 The figures are apparently taken from "Hotkalender" for 1914.

53 Lenin has in mind L. Martov's article "What Follows from the 'Right to National Self-Determination'" (nos. 17 and 18 of "Our Voice").

54 This concerns the following citation from Martov's aforementioned article: "...in the sphere of international relations, the dominion of capitalist relations leads to the fact that the overgrowth of the economy beyond state boundaries is accomplished through rigid struggle between states, through the absorption of weak nations by strong, through the exploitation and political enslavement of the former by the latter, through the transformation of the most powerful national states into world empires."

55 Is meant the following citation from the same article: "...the onset of the imperialist stage in the development of world capitalism—economically characterized by the complete dominion of financial capital over industrial and commercial—halted, without allowing it to be completed, the process of formation of national states founded on the triumph of the right of national self-determination."

56 This concerns, apparently, the following passage from Hilferding: "As for the newly opened-up countries—there imported capital strengthens antagonisms and calls forth constantly growing resistance of peoples, awakening to national consciousness, against foreigners; this resistance can easily grow into dangerous measures directed against foreign capital. The old social relations are revolutionized at their root, the thousand-year agrarian separateness of 'non-historical nations' is destroyed, they are drawn into capitalist circulation. Capitalism itself gradually gives the conquered peoples the means and methods for liberation. And they put forward that goal which once appeared to European nations as the highest: the creation of a unified national state as an instrument of economic and cultural freedom. This movement toward independence threatens European capital in its most valuable spheres of exploitation, promising the most brilliant prospects, and European capital can maintain dominion only by constantly increasing its military forces." ("Financial Capital: The Latest Phase in the Development of Capitalism." Authorized translation from the German and introductory article by I. I. Stepanov. Publishers "V. I. Znamensky and Co." Moscow, 1912, p. 487).

"Does it not follow from this that the working class writes into its minimum program the demand for the rights of nations to self-determination in vain?"—writes Martov. "This opinion has been expressed before and is expressed now by certain Marxists. Only recently an entire group of Dutch Marxists, headed by Pannekoek and Gorter, refused even to sign the well-known Zimmerwald declaration on the grounds that the latter puts forward, among other slogans, the slogan of free self-determination."

58 This concerns, apparently, that passage of the draft resolution submitted by the left section of the international socialist conference in Zimmerwald: "World War and the Tasks of Social Democracy," in which it speaks of the relation to social-patriotism and social-imperialism (see Works of Lenin, vol. XVIII, p. 416).

59 This concerns, apparently, no. 1 of "Vorbote" ("Herald"), January 1916, in which was placed Lenin's article "Opportunism and the Collapse of the Second International" (see Works, vol. XIX, pp. 1—15).

60 This concerns the following citation from the same article by Martov: "The forms in which one or another national party would like to realize the right of its people to self-determination may run counter to the course of social development and to the interests of the proletariat. Let us take, for example, the Armenian people. Recognition of their right to decide their own political fate does not oblige us to support the slogan of any nation that desires to realize its right to self-determination by forming a separate state with its own army, its own customs wall, etc. If we find that such a new state would have no economic basis for its development, we, from the standpoint of the interests of the working class, while defending the right of free self-determination, will strive to ensure that the Armenian nation realizes this self-determination in another form."

61 See "Materials for the Report," section VIII, p. 266.

62 This concerns the following citation from Martov's article: "...The principle of national self-determination is constantly invoked to justify the political participation of the working class in the defense of the country. If the working class, they say (socialists of Germany and France), demands in its program freedom of national self-determination, then it logically follows that when this freedom is endangered, it is obliged to defend it, consequently, it is obliged to participate in the defense of its nation... In fact, does participation in defense follow from the right to self-determination? To this question a Marxist must give a negative answer. Participation in defense cannot be derived from the right to self-determination. Whoever wishes to ground participation in defense must find another principled justification."

* MATERIALS FOR THE REPORT "'CONDITIONS OF PEACE' IN CONNECTION WITH THE NATIONAL QUESTION"

K[arl] K[autsky] N[eue] Z[eit], 27/XI 1914, p. 250:

"It cannot be supposed in any way that the policy of the International turned out to be a soap bubble that burst upon collision with the harsh realities of war. On the contrary, this policy is deeply rooted in the vital conditions of the proletariat. It must inevitably awaken to new life and new effective force (Wirksamkeit) as soon as there appears an opportunity for action in favor of peace (Friedensaktion). Then the time will come again for the International as an instrument of peace, and then it will become clear whether war has undermined its strength or not. Then we shall see whether 'national paroxysm' has freed international thought and feeling, or whether the latter has on the contrary victoriously asserted its force and finds expression in unanimous accord with the international peace program.

'If this succeeds, then something great will have happened (ist grosses geschehen). And we have every reason to expect that this will succeed.'...

...'Whatever the immediate practical success of the International's peace program in the establishment of peace conditions, its lasting, propagandistic success must inevitably be mighty in any case'..."

Excerpt from K. Kautsky's article "Die Internationalität und der Krieg" ("Internationality and War") written by Lenin in Russian translation on a separate sheet of paper, numbered "1" (see introductory remark on p. 236). Red.